mattag08

Something that is being missed here is ED's atmosphere model is completely broken. No one is posting the air pressure or temperature settings for their testings. That matters. And in DCS it *really* matters because the effect on density of temperature in particular is insane. Additionally, the air pressure calculations are so wrong as to be laughable. ED admitted this was done to compress the battlespace and force aircraft to be in closer proximity than they would in the real world. Even though they have walked back similar changes (notably missiles) they have not fixed the atmosphere. Firing missiles at 40,000' is akin to 60-70k' IRL. Firing missiles at sea level is like firing a missile through sludge. Temperature is even worse, with very cold temperatures causing conditions similar to flying through water and very hot temperatures making flight almost impossible. I honestly don't know what comparing a real life missile or real life testing is going to do for anyone when the atmosphere we fire our digital missiles through bears no resemblance to real life.

What exactly is your MP testing methodology? Most of the MP bugs that don't appear in SP don't manifest until there are 30+ clients. Also most seem multicrew related and need a human pilot and RIO to reproduce.

For squadrons that operate the same aircraft BuNos mission to mission, it would nice to have a way to make the difference fixed by livery or fixed in general so that a pilot getting in a certain jet would know what kind of items would be in the cockpit already. Would add some immersion too, IMO.

Yep, like I said it feels abnormal. Grumman was smarter than that when they built this bird.

I know how to do a weight and balance. I'm a professional aviator. We do not have the requisite information to do what you are talking about. Since HB continues to refuse to give us this info, an auto-calculated kneeboard is the next best hope. If you have the W&B data for these weapons and the aircraft simulated, I'd love to have that info.

Considering there are still concerns about what the real weight of the jet is, it would be great to have the ACTUAL simulated gross weight with the current loadout, drag index, and take off trim setting (pitch and roll) on the kneeboard since we don't have access to the proper documentation to calculate it ourselves.

Is there supposed to also be a pitch up with flap retraction? That's what I'm seeing in the sim at the moment.

Simply not correct. The most common trainer in the world, the 172 requires forward pressure to counteract flap deployment. I've flown at least a few more aircraft that have this behavior. The physics are not as simple as "it always does X". However, whatever flap deployment does, you expect flap retraction to do the opposite, which is my point. I believe the point where fuel flow is measured is ahead of/not connected to the A/B fuel lines, so it can't measure the A/B FF.

You can use voice attack already. Just need to map the proper button combination.

So happy we finally got course/heading bug knob binds. Now we just need binds for Jester to utilize the Next Target button and Jester commands to adjust the antenna elevation by horizon-referenced degrees and relative degrees and we should be good to go.

How is it possible to break the lighting in this jet every single time we have a significant patch? I need to know if this is HB's or ED's fault because someone doesn't know how to properly manage their code.

Flap behavior seems abnormal, but I'll defer to Victory for final comment. Pitching moment should be down for flaps retraction and up for flaps extension. I know the horizontal stab is auto adjusted to smooth these out. Currently, both flaps retract and extend cause a nose up pitching moment (flaps retract is much greater than flaps extend). Seems excessive and backwards. I can get the nose to climb to 20-30 degrees by just cycling the flaps...

Unless ED stealth patched it at some point, the standard atmosphere in DCS was found to be modeled incorrectly when a 3rd party did computational fluid dynamics analysis of all of ED's missiles in the game and compared them to known parameters. The effects of temperature, pressure, and the rate of change of each with altitude are not modeled properly, which affects performance at different altitudes. It would also affect the performance of different aircraft differently since aircraft are optimized for certain Mach numbers, altitudes, etc. which means the non-standard atmosphere will cause better or worse performance depending on a number of factors. To summarize: this debate is largely moot because ED won't provide a proper atmosphere model.

Personally, I would be totally fine with this workaround. My unit really would love to have a player flown tanker.

This isn't the whole story. I just had a flight of four in the same flight and three of us could not take off until one particular aircraft launched. There was no particular order other than possibly it is related to the spawn order of the aircraft onto the carrier. This happened in both the F-14 and the new T-45 mod.